Ted Cruz Ping! If you want on/off this ping list, please let me know.
Please beware, this is a high-volume ping list!
CRUZ or LOSE!
Posted on 06/12/2015 5:05:09 AM PDT by Patton@Bastogne
Debate is limited to 20 hours inn each house.
By law. The the vote must occur.
That is exactly correct. This posturing by those that voted for TPA is theater. It's like for voting for closure on a bill and then voting again the bill. The closure vote was the vote. They think we are stupid. Looks like I can scratch Cruz and Walker off my list of acceptable candidates. Maybe we can draft Sessions?
Yep. Saying that the TPP doesn't do that is a bold lie the Cruz campaign is selling.
But, be advised, Trump is adamantly opposed to TPA and TPP. He is also opposed to Amnesty in any form, including the "legalization" of illegals here now. He supports the Southern Wall. He supports enforcement of existing immigrations law.
Just sayin'.
What Cruz has done (or, better, will do if he now votes against TPP) is diminish himself, reduced himself into being just another one if the GOP contenders.
If he loses his differentiation, and everything else becomes equal, the big difference between him and, say, Walker is that Walker beat the crap out of the WI unions and survived. Thats not a good place for Cruz to be.
Hmmm... who’d a thunk so many FReepers could be so bad wrong?
"The Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) would fast-track at least three highly secretive trade deals—specifically the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP), the Trade in Services Agreement (TiSA), and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (T-TIP)—and potentially more deals.
Right now, TiSA and T-TIP text are completely secretive and unavailable for even members of Congress to read while TPP text is available for members to review—although they need to go to a secret room inside the Capitol where only members of Congress and certain staffers high-level security clearances, who can only go when members are present, can read the bill."
This TPA is opening the floodgates for a whole lotta hurt to be inflicted on this Nation.
That's what I understand to be the facts as well. I made the same point in a post yesterday. I was trying to think of a single "trade agreement" that has been voted down, and can't.
I also believe that calling it an "agreement" rather than a "treaty" is merely an end-run around the constitutional requirement of higher vote percentages for treaties.
That is dishonest, and needs to be spoken to.
I can’t disagree one bit.
You speak of “differentiation” between Cruz and other extraordinarily accomplished candidates who have already proven themselves in the mine fields, and if Cruz should lose trust, then the margin can be reduced to rhetoric pretty quickly.
I support Cruz, but never thought he could afford many drastic errors given his accomplished competition. (Governors can more often be hell on newly minted senators running for president in their first dang term anyway.)
Maybe Cruz is running for VP, after all. I don’t quite know.
Well Trump is mostly a salesman, and a very good salesman too. I’d have to see him in the debates, but I do like his position on the issues you’ve outlined. So he is still on my acceptable list, certainly not at the top thou.
The provisions for no filibuster has been in EVERY Fast Track bill for the past 80 years that was specified in the Cruz statement.
Doesn’t seem to be the bad horrible bill that people say it is...
Nobody can answer WHY Duncan Hunter also voted for it.
Also, why are Dems so afraid of it.
I like Cruz’s explanation and his willingness to fight for his beliefs. He might be wrong at times, but he is the only conservative worth voting for in this race.
Yup.
I'd be fine with not having amendments, and even a lack of the ability to filibuster if they would call a spade a spade, and require the 2/3 vote as specified in the constitution for treaties.
The other stuff is procedural stuff the Constitution does not speak to. It's up to congress how it operates on a procedural basis.
One thing for folks to keep in mind is that if the ratification of this treaty can be delayed until after the election, any agreement as to procedure agreed to by the current congress is not binding on future congresses. The supreme court has ruled on that way back. One congress cannot bind another.
Honestly, the only ones who disagree with Cruz are people with agendas. They can never say who they support and no matter what happens, they will bash Cruz.
Check the posts...always the same talking points. Usually from the same folks. They just post more of the same stuff...
i’d say the majority on FR support cruz....as do Conservatives in general.
Congress is the only entity that can (legally) make US law.
Well, I guess my donation to this same letter canceled your out.
So, who do you support now?
Those who have an agenda won’t listen to you. They are too blinded by hatred of cruz.
Ted Cruz Ping! By doing your Masters' bidding, you are insulting Conservatives in America that refuse to be sacrificed by corrupt politicians that crave more power.
Protectionist fear mongers who side with the majority of liberals against the majority of conservatives aren’t interested in facts.
I expect this thread to bring out the “Cruz isn’t natural born” freaks.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.